Apr 25, 2013 3:01 PM

It damages the "security" by making it a NON NEGOTIABLE instrument.

IF IT IS WRITTEN, IT IS LAW. You just converted the instrument into NON NEGOTIABLE JUNK.

If you RESERVE ALL RIGHTS, the BEARER of the instrument HAS NONE.

I just sign things VOID.

What if the other party accepted the instrument, or contract, under those terms? Let's say a bank receives a negotiable instrument, or contract, and it's signed and/or endorsed as ARR WOR WOP. Whoever keeps the negotiable instrument, or contract. is liable for it, if they don't return it following banking laws?

Why is that YOUR problem?

Seriously, what does it have to do with you?

Ok, look at it another way: If I blow my wad in a TENDER FOR LAW groupie, and she goes into the bathroom after, I don't care if she squirts it into the toilet, takes "creampie" shots with her cell phone, or rubs it into her face for that "youthful glow"... I blew my wad, the job's done.

If you write extra terms, and they accept, then it's THEIR problem, not yours.

Well it does not have to do with me. There is a "movement" in the US of people making seminars, telling people to turn cheques of closed checking accounts into EFT's, and to sign and endorse a certain way. I think Derek talked about that in some thread.

Also, I read here about how is it that one should sing, if ever, any document. And you, and Derek, have given examples, not to mention Pierre, and I want to understand WHY is that people sign that way, and the implications of it.

<<Non Assumpsit is a Latin tern which means he did not undertake. It is an archaic pleading form of a general denial in an action of assumpsit. It is a form of pleading in which the defendant claims that s/he did not undertake or promise any obligation in the manner or form set forth in the plaintiff's complaint.

Under this plea almost every matter may be given in evidence, on the ground that as the action is founded on the contract, and the injury is the nonperformance of it, evidence which disaffirms the obligation of the contract at the time when the action was commenced goes to the gist of the action.>>

When you put "BY:", or "AUTHORIZED BY:", in a document, you are saying that it is NOT that PERSON signing. The PERSON has surety, not you. You only have AUTHORITY.

I really think that groupie/blow-my-wad thing should be in the "gold" notes... Just sayin'

...I wonder how many people are looking up "creampie shot" now.

YES it does belong in the "gold" notes, indeed! Keep the rivers of gold coming. Cluster bomb the system, I'll be glad to help!

In other matters, I just looked at the definition of "creampie shot". Oh, behave! [iminent=0vTMYlR59l2]

They're MY groupies and they can take as many Creampie Shots as they wish.

Authorized by - or agent for / authorized representative ect...

I'm looking for a way to segue into an example where I can put Tender-for-law-groupie and "dirty sanchez" into it. :D

DIRTY SANCHEZ = taking poo from the girls bum, reaching around, and giving her a 'moustache' with it - i learned about that living in L.A.

I'm a worldly fellow.

I know here in Michigan they try to force us to sign a "advice of rights" form at arraignment or right at the beginning of the next hearing if one didn't sign it and doesn't Reserve All Rights "ab intio" to be exempt and in full control, accordingly thereafter the judge in county district court threatens them to be in "contempt indefinitely" if they don't sign, of course, I didn't and took exception to the rule and ol Kirk W TAbbey said you must, its a "trust" to make sure your constitutional protections are available; I laughed to myself (it's a trick for surety) and said you've taken an oath which you are bound by and all the trust I need to know of, have you not? and If not I don't trust anyone in here.

Many many qjestions I have... and a few points too: Wasn't it (and if so, is it still) acceptable to sign a contract with an X? And if you dont want to be held to signing any contact...why not just refuse to sign it? In this day an age...if someone doesn't know what those terms you mentioned are.... They have alot more than "law" to worry about learning (and would wind up hiring Deuce Bigalow as their lawyer)...wirh the amount of research going on here, I'm sure they can figger it out if thwy really wantes too lol

I be back cell is done!

at Shawn Ofthefamily Folkes you dont have to sign anything if you don't want to and I don't think writing X nullifies anything. The only time not signing is a problem usually is in court if the judge tries to force it like he did to me. In my case the judge at arraignment put it in the record as signed even though I didn't, therefore at the next trial date they had to force it on me to reflect the record and continue.

You should have charged that judge with falsifying a document...and I didnt kniw anyonr coukd FORCE anyone to sign ANYTHING. I would think it would be these "forced" contracts that the OP woild apply to, and in such cases (like yours) im thinking THAT is when I would make sure I add "under duress", "without prejudice", "all rights reserved", or "kiss my black ass", to my signature. Ive had cops write "refuse to sign" on shit I wasnt even asked to sign...I was asleep after they had kidnapped me, and snuck and stuck a notice at my feet like bitches and then said I didnt sign...which is fine for I later saidbi was unaware as I was.presented with nothing.

Theres something from days of old where signing things with an X meant something.... or so my memory archives tell me...

I sign Vi Coactus ( by force or constraint) I am not new to this. I actually go to courts and stand my ground and if anyone thinks its a cake walk I would like to hear their story and no they cant force you but they can beat you or take you and taser you or hold you indefinitely for contempt which they probably wont for a dumb signature however i bet they will hold someone for 1 yr in the county jail at least.

or call you a crazy and attempt to force examination upon you and poisonous pills so this is the type of sick system we have that challenges people who stand their ground

vi coactus means under threat of force (duress). and IF they know that trick, elipsis ... as a prefix they may not. ... means meant to say somthing at that point and can be used either before or after. an X IS a signature, ANY MARK of any kind IS a signature or authorization, look up 'the four corners rule of contracting and [means] is within that, so anything boxed in is not a part theirof...

yes I knew I came across it before David thanks for reassurance.

its funny because that reminded me of the bail out "bond conditions" form the signature line is in a huge rectangle box.

It could be asked of anyone attempting to force another to contract - by what authority are you impairing my right to contract. Is it not public policy and law that all contracts must be 1.voluntary and 2.Of reasonable expectation? Proof of claim please and we can proceed...or are you also claiming I cannot provide the remedy here?

By: Charles Moreland, without prejudice, non assumpsit, all rights reserved

..you're a sick-man, Maximiliano ;)

Hey Derek Moran, is you that taught me what DIRTY SANCHEZ is! :)

BY:______________________ Master of PIERRE DAOUST 26X-XXX-XXX

Master is one who has control over a servant An individual who hires employees or servants to perform services and who directs the manner in which such services are performed.

The ONLY reason of PIERRE DAOUST's existence, is to serve "ME"

The government created a SLAVE named PIERRE DAOUST, and made "ME" beneficiary and Master of that slave.

the person= debtor

Of course the government benefits greater than the Living man beneficiary, even if we knew the secrets of how to 'pay' or discharge our 'debts'.

Debt instrument cannot pay a debt it is illegal

how to sign thread

You only need to show the INTENT to indicate duress.

duress, [], V.C., ... (elipsys), all things which can be used to show intent. my friend signs left handed to show intent and remind himself if asked...

dirty sanchez is when your drunk ass friend has passed out and you do it to him. doing it to a girl as described above derik, is simply a love affair.

You only need to demonstrate the INTENT to reserve all rights.

I only need to demonstrate the INTENT to do anything if I get it right ? ....it's all about INTENT ? ... good or bad.....

YES.

LAW is ONLY about INTENT.

Nobody can even CONTRACT without INTENT.

Contracts set RULES (LAW) to INSURE the INTENT is EXECUTED.

I have been re-reading all previous post, and notes from the group. There are SO MANY things Scott, and some others, had written/commented a few short months ago. I didn't have a clue what many really meant, they went right over my head.

NOW, after getting to grasp many of the teachings by Scott, ALL those previous post MAKE MUCH SENSE TODAY. Some look now brand spanking new to ME.

So just something I wanted to share with the good people at TTFL group is to re-read ALL previous post. You will find the glittering of gold all over them.

For example, I wrote this thread back in April 25th, 2013. It's only NOW, August 12th, 2013, that I can say I truly comprehend INTENT in contracts. I used to read about it here, but things went right over my head. Today Scott revises INTENT in contracts, and NOW it makes sense.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/htviuvsf7voj61k/The%20Tender%20for%20Law%20-%20The%20Best%20of%21%20Gold%20nuggets%20notes.docx

Does just INITIALING a document, have the same effect as signing it with your SIGNATURE?

did YOUR HAND make the mark and was that action witnessed (by a live human)?

derek, i just dont believe YOU asked that question. (and scott didnt creampie bitch slap you about it).

i bet if THEY claimed you had your hand on THE PEN that you meant to..., and before the body's cold...

claim being illiterate and not know how to hold a pen.

You know what David Johansen- Adam Thomas is absolutely fucking right, i like the new ME.

So YOU, are going to FUCKING ANSWER, that FUCKING QUESTION i just POSED. Cuz the last time i CHECKED, i wasnt BORN a fucking EXPERT-on-the-SUBJECT, YOU FUCKING IDIOT...

WHAT, IS THE FUCKING DIFFERENCE, between INITIALING a document, and SIGNING a document with your SIGNATURE, and/or, is there ANY FUCKING DIFFERENCE AT ALL YOU FUCKING IMBECILE?

..now go FETCH your book on the subject since you're such A FUCKING EXPERT on it - SHITHEAD

did you concent to just leave your mark or not?

jwf=endorse John Wade Frisbey=indoresment. what's the latter is what gives value and make surety

yuuurrpp......teaser time now Derek.....are ye sure ye can handle it mate because it sounds like you're about to explode.....uhoh.....look out.....hahahahahahahaha,,,,

old the wicked webs we weave when we practice to deceive

because it says so Derek.....it just does ok mate........hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah........go look for yourself mate......lol...lol...lollllll

Ok Derek Moran...it says so RIGHT UPON MY BOLLOCKS......TEA BAG TIME BITCH :-)"

Oh hang on..I just did a complete Derek, by ASSUMING Derek Moran was in actual fact calling me out to answer his question but it could have been David Johansen, that he was swearing & cursing to....all manner of profanities.....you sound real toey Derek. ...a bit like me cept I'm toey for an empty out of my nut sack....& ye keep referring to cock sucking...soooo....zzziiippp.... Flop..... Bollocks. .... Tea bag time bitch. .... Hahahahahahahahahaha

Imbecile....hmmm...again was that our friend David Johansen, ye referred to as being an IMBECILE or ME please Derek Moran?? I'm confused....needs dumbing down just a tad more please mate....lil lower....gutter height is good....ok now please Derek.

fuck T it's time to smoke some motherfucking G. let's go help me on this bills of exchange Adam step by step for the stamps go

I got dad duties to perform first John boy...later mate...promise ye.

oh you're right you're with liberty to day

Yuuurrrpp. .. Derek Moran, mate....there's sum thing ye should know....I sent YOU A PRIVATE PERSONAL MESSAGE.....anndd...heres another Scott Duncanism....would it better if I insert the word 'PRIVATE' in neon lights??....yep kudos again to 'OUR' Captain... WE can see what's wrong but now we all can see.....I knew your next move & ye took my bait....too easy....like pinching lollies from a child....Ye still ask wrong because ye value wrong maybe....but here's the thing though Derek, NEARLY THE WHOLE FUCKING PLANET DOES... Ye reacted to ME personally because you misinterpreted my language barrier coming from butt-fuck-central hickstown hicksville in the KUNTree called AUstralia. All capital letters must be interpreted by you as being &/or sounding threatening...we dumb kunts down under find your comments disparaging & degrading towards our kuntree.....but why are we larfing out LOUDLY at you Derek? ? You're just not listening to anyone but ye are adding tremendous value that I personally could not keep up with.....I also would like to BELIEVE in you Derek, as being a real fairdinkum leader of not onoy the t4lg but globally a very STRONG , POWERFUL VOICE FOR THE PEOPLE OF THIS PLANET.......YOU DID T H IS TO YOURSELF DEREK...Mirror time mate....I will never apologies for a wrong word I said as I knew it as my truth....I would like to meet ye personally & then ye can see the real me Derek. ...I hold no ill feelings towards ye Derek....I just needed to slap ye in the face &/or KICK YE IN THE NUTS.....YOU......negative me.....

Ok...is this place just became The Tender fot Psychology ????...What the fuck is wrong with you pot smokers ?....

I am constantly intrigued by how many people engage in discussion of matters which have no relevance to them.

KNOW THIS: EVERYTHING which originates from any agency or faction of the LEGAL SOCIETY is FRAUD. It is ONLY directed towards the FICTION created by an agency or faction of the LEGAL SOCIETY.

NOTHING which originates from any agency or faction of the LEGAL SOCIETY is EVER directed towards a Living, breathing man

If you are a Living, breathing man, and NOT a FICTION created by an agency or faction of the LEGAL SOCIETY, NOTHING originating therefrom has relevance to/for you.

Above all, "Know who you are, and to what Law you are bound."

ADAM...NOT, YOU - clear?

ZJ Free - Knowing your not a PERSON is only half the solution. Learning to competently operate in admiralty and handling your biz is the other 50%. Just saying your a man not a person won't protect your property from paper tigers:-) Peace.

Ps. It's not fraud if you consent (remain silent/argue/explain) to the offer, it's a contract.

DEREK, THE ANSWER IS *NO*, it makes no difference (the pat travers band). if your hand makes anything THEY could claim is an autograph, without any physical interferance by any other party and that action was witnessed (creating evidence by proof), they could hold it against you or you to it.

Derek Moran....I really do in my TRUTH & HEART.....SUPPORT WHAT YE ARE DOING......BUT I ALWAYS ASK THE QUESTION......DO NOT HATE ME FOR THAT PLEASE MATE!! WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME TEAM HERE BROTHER......